The redacted Iran op-ed revealed:"The New York Times has taken the unusual step of publishing an op-ed in which parts of the contents have been 'redacted' or blacked out by government censors, who believe that its contents would reveal 'sensitive' information that the White House wants to withold. Below is RAW STORY's best informed guess at what might hide behind the redactions."

12/22/06

We have all heard about FLYNT LEVERETT's efforts to get his OP-ED printed in the NY Times. Even after the CIA had cleared the piece as being OK, and un-classified material, the Bush administration scrambled to get the piece - at least, parts of it - edited out.

The argument that Iran helped America in Afghanistan because it was in Tehran’s interest to get rid of the Taliban is misplaced. Iran could have let America remove the Taliban without getting its own hands dirty, as it remained neutral during the 1991 gulf war. Tehran cooperated with United States efforts in Afghanistan primarily because it wanted a better relationship with Washington.

But Tehran was profoundly disappointed with the United States response. After the 9/11 attacks, xxx xxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxx xx set the stage for a November 2001 meeting between Secretary of State Colin Powell and the foreign ministers of Afghanistan’s six neighbors and Russia. xxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxx xx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxx xxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Iran went along, working with the United States to eliminate the Taliban and establish a post-Taliban political order in Afghanistan.

In December 2001, xxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx x Tehran to keep Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the brutal pro-Al Qaeda warlord, from returning to Afghanistan to lead jihadist resistance there. xxxxx xxxxxxx so long as the Bush administration did not criticize it for harboring terrorists. But, in his January 2002 State of the Union address, President Bush did just that in labeling Iran part of the “axis of evil.” Unsurprisingly, Mr. Hekmatyar managed to leave Iran in short order after the speech. xxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxx the Islamic Republic could not be seen to be harboring terrorists.

It should be interesting to see if some of the brighter bulbs in the Blogosphere can piece some of the edited material together. To make the game easier and more fun for all of us: Leverett has provided his original citations “to demonstrate that all of the material the White House objected to is already in the public domain.”

Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, has submitted plans to go ahead with a retirement that is months overdue, according to the U.S. Central Command.

And the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, has indicated in recent months that he also may not stay much longer than the end of this year.Subscribe Today!

Since they have opposed sending more troops to Iraq, their departures could make it easier for Bush and his new Defense Secretary Robert Gates to switch course in the troubled campaign, where they are considering a short-term surge in forces."

And they are retiring rather than get onboard with the Bush and Lieberman troubled course of action. Sound like a familiar situation?

Retired generals speak out to oppose Rumsfeld:"In this, Powell echoed former Army chief of staff Gen. Eric Shinseki, who told Congress just weeks before the 2003 invasion that several hundred thousand US troops would be necessary to secure Iraq after the invasion. For this he was publicly contradicted by then Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. Rumsfeld named General Shinseki's replacement a year before he was to retire and broke custom by not attending his retirement ceremony."--- csmonitor.com

Remember that General Shinseki was pretty much forced into retirement for disagreeing with the fool on the hill.

sptmck offers 1% more insight into this foolish course of action:

1% MORE CONSCIOUS:"It’s official: Oedipus Lieberman has morphed into Captain Ahab, another tragically fueled figure. In this unfolding novel of contemporary American foreign policy, Melville’s masterpiece certainly comes to mind because as we grapple with how to “catch” some sort of success in Iraq, the ubiquitous presence in the American psyche, it eludes us just like the whale-the ubiquitous presence in the novel—escapes mad Ahab. And Ahab’s as deranged as they come. So is Lieberman. "

Auction For the American Way Closes Tomorrow, December 21!Now is your last chance to bid on one-of-a-kind pieces of rare celebrity memorabilia, once-in-a-lifetime celebrity experiences, and blue-chip artwork from today’s leading artists! Every penny helps fight for democratic rights and freedoms, so bid now to support our important work while scoring unique celebrity memorabilia at the same time! The auction ends tomorrow, December 21!

At this point you have about 9 hours left to look and bid. Normally I wouldn't plug stuff in my Blog that would cost ya... It has to be for a half decent cause. PFAW, along with several left groups like American Progress, spearheaded the campaign against Alito and has helped chammpion other imprtant issues and I am sure many of you are already familiar with them. Plus, there is some pretty cool stuff still left there.

Man! If I Had the money I'd be playing that signed Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young guitar OR the John Fogerty (CCR) signed guitar. (Why do I suddenly feel like I am some sort of antique memerobilia after re-reading that last sentence? lol) Though, it wouldn't be safe to bring jewels like that into my house considering what my 3 kids have already done to my guitars. You can also bid on a chance to participate in the Sam Seder Show.

W. Patrick Lang and Ray McGovern have a great piece up at tompaine.com talking about the politics of the "surge" foolishness and a breakdown of what bush failures loom on the horizon if anybody takes this option seriously.

"The media are abuzz with trial balloons with official leaks that President George W. Bush is about to approve a “surge” in U.S. troop strength in Iraq by tens of thousands. At the same time, surge advocate Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., just back from a brief visit to the Green Zone with fellow surgers John McCain, R-Ariz., and Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., has warned that “the amount of troops will make no difference” if Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki avoids taking “bold” moves. The three pretend to be unaware that the most important move for which they pressed—breaking with radical Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr—would amount to political suicide for Maliki.

Meanwhile, back at the Sunday talk shows, incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who owes his position to the popular revolt in November against the war, said he can “go along” with a surge, but only for two to three months and only as part of a broader strategy to bring combat forces home by early 2008. Meanwhile, says Reid, Democrats will “give the military anything they want.”

Can Reid be oblivious to the reality that this has to do with the next two years—not the next two months? Former Army vice chief of staff Gen. Jack Keane, one of the anointed retired generals who have Bush’s ear, is urging him to send 30,000 to 40,000 more troops and has already dismissed the possibility of a time-frame shorter than one and a half years. What seems clear is that the president is determined that the war not be lost while he is in office. But events are moving too fast for that. It was not quite the way he meant it, but Bush has gotten one thing right; there will indeed be no “graceful exit.” That goes in spades, if he sends still more troops."

Now before all of these learned people out there say that this guy has no creds, and is wrong because "we just have to send more troops!" much like they say to me when I say the same effin' thing in diary comments, bear in mind that Col. Lang is a guy that Wolf Blitzer had this to say about in an interview with Lang the other night:

BLITZER: I went back and took a look at what you told me back on May 24, 2004, that's two and a half years ago when you were interviewed by me. And you were pretty much on. You were really concerned about his notion of having some autonomous zones, if you will, a Kurdish zone, a Shiite zone, a Sunni zone.

You said if the U.S. were to go in that direction and let it happen that would be a recipe you said for creating civil war and leading the Middle East in chaos. Is that worst fear that you had then being materialized right now?

LANG: Yes it really is. There's a lot of talk about how some people think we should partition Iraq. Actually, we're past the point of what I said there. Iraq is in fact partitioning itself. It's in the process of doing that right now.

The danger is that this process will continue and that all of the outside players who are allied to people inside Iraq will join in the fighting, and you'll have a tremendous regional war. There are some people who think that wouldn't be a bad idea, but I think it will be a disaster.

Yep... that is Pro-Iraq-War Wolfie and what is he saying? Holy shit! Two-and-a-half years ago people like Lang were saying this would happen... And they were right.

I bet bush still will not listen to people that know a bit about what is happening in the real world. But, then again, neither do right-wingnut pundits in the Blogosphere that cheer for more soldiers just because they don't want to lose face any more than bush does. Nobody likes to admit they have been flat out wrong on almost every important issue for years. For bush it is all about one last hail mary pass to save his political legacy or, at the very least, to push the failure off onto the next White House administration.

As for the rest of you right-wingnut Blogosphere pundits content to cheer on surging towards more failure: What's your fucking excuse?

The more we piss off the incompetents entrenched in the MSM, and the more that some of them would like to margenalize us, the more it validates that what we are doing is not only the right thing to do, but that we do it very well.

They failed to take the net's neutrality away from us on the federal level. Now they will try to come after us on the state level.

Together we won the first round in the battle for Net freedom. But the phone and cable giants are launching a counterattack. We need to raise the alarm and send a clear message to our new Congress: Make Net Neutratlity the Law in 2007!

It really doesn't matter if you Blog about politics, music, gardening, or if you have a website that deals with anything else, like a small business, or a community service oriented site. Ending Net Neutrality would have the direct result of cutting you out of the internet information loop if you don't have the money to pay for ELITE access. The big telco's will try and slip this in at the state level everywhere if we don't keep a constant watch for laws that could strip us of equality in our internet voice.

The internet belongs to everyone.

We need to be pro-active on this issue by urging our state politicians to pass laws guarenteeing Net Neutrality in the State of Connecticut. This is an issue that we can effectively end before they come after us.

That's right, stole. The filmmaker, FluxRostrum, was not arrested. He did not receive a receipt for seized property. He was not even directly asked for his camera. Instead, without any warning, he was jumped by two police officers, one of whom is an NYPD captain, and knocked down onto the asphalt of 39th Street. One police officer was succcesful in wrenching the camera out of Flux's hands. As Flux crawled around on the ground looking for the eyeglasses which had been knocked off his face during the attack, the cop with the camera quickly conferred with another officer. Then he ran off to hide the camera.

The video is worth checking out and demonstrates the need for Citizen Journalists and video Bloggers to take precautions and always watch each others' backs when they are in politically charged situations.

12/18/06

If I were Glen Renolds I would be mighty pissed that someone had the gaul to put somethig I wrote up as a comparison to his work in their take on the McCain/Schumer war on Blogs:

CoolAqua:"But what really scares me about this affront on Internet liberty is that it is all wrapped up in a package called "child pornography"; the public will probably clamor for this bill. Is this right out of Karl Roves play-book or what? Ralph Reed used his evangelicals to take out competing casinos, and now McCain will try to use these same people to try to take out bloggers, in the name of child pornography.

This could wreak havoc on sites like Booman Tribune, dKOs and otherbigcommunities. Nevermind the fact that little Blogs like your Blogspot could end up shutting down completely. How many of us can afford a $300,000 dollar fine?

After child pornography or some forms of "obscenity" are found and reported, the Web site must retain any "information relating to the facts or circumstances" of the incident for at least six months. Webmasters would be immune from civil and criminal liability if they followed the specified procedures exactly.

Internet service providers already must follow those reporting requirements. But McCain's proposal is liable to be controversial because it levies the same regulatory scheme--and even stiffer penalties--on even individual bloggers who offer discussion areas on their Web sites."

Not that Renolds is particularly good at what he does (How good can you be when you have to write stuff for the Bush cheerleader faction at instapundit? Bush just doesn't give you much good news to work with) BUT even I realize that CoolAqua must have really wanted to insult Renolds to put his quote up beside the ranting and ravings of this here lunatic...

And for that I will thank CoolAqua for their outstanding effort in going above and beyond when it comes to informing their local readers in a fun and educational way. Maybe I will give YOU the award as Time Magazine's Person of the Year! heh

[update]I think I should give My Floating Worlds the award, as well, for having the good sense to leave me wondering whether I should be insulted or just Glen Beck... Either way, they would likely be correct.

If your Blog didn't take any of these great awards this year you can take solace in the fact that "YOU" won Time Magazine's Person of the Year. You don't want to get too greedy, do you? Your participation in Blogging and your other internet activities have made you worthy of your important award. You deserve to take a bow for your great efforts.

As for this great honor, I am in the same camp as Jon Swift who wonders "Why You and not Me? What have you done that deserves this honor more than I do?"

"American guards arrived at the man’s cell periodically over the next several days, shackled his hands and feet, blindfolded him and took him to a padded room for interrogation, the detainee said. After an hour or two, he was returned to his cell, fatigued but unable to sleep.

The fluorescent lights in his cell were never turned off, he said. At most hours, heavy metal or country music blared in the corridor. He said he was rousted at random times without explanation and made to stand in his cell. Even lying down, he said, he was kept from covering his face to block out the light, noise and cold. And when he was released after 97 days he was exhausted, depressed and scared.

Detainee 200343 was among thousands of people who have been held and released by the American military in Iraq, and his account of his ordeal has provided one of the few detailed views of the Pentagon’s detention operations since the abuse scandals at Abu Ghraib. Yet in many respects his case is unusual.

The detainee was Donald Vance, a 29-year-old Navy veteran from Chicago who went to Iraq as a security contractor. He wound up as a whistle-blower, passing information to the F.B.I. about suspicious activities at the Iraqi security firm where he worked, including what he said was possible illegal weapons trading."

12/17/06

Not only did Republicans put this dangerous information out there on the internet (already in Arabic to ensure the ease of use by middle-east terrorists) BUT they forced this to be put out there in their desperate attempts to link Saddam Hussein to Al Qaeda. A link that never existed:

The director of national intelligence, John D. Negroponte, had resisted setting up the Web site, which some intelligence officials felt implicitly raised questions about the competence and judgment of government analysts. But President Bush approved the site’s creation after Congressional Republicans proposed legislation to force the documents’ release.

And these are the idiot Republicans that claim to keep us safer?

It seems that they are at it again, this time telling the enemy how we will fight them.

Why is the DoD Making it Available to Insurgents,Terrorists? Your IraqSlogger editors are stunned that the Pentagon has released to the entire world and posted on the Web the U.S. military’s new 282-page counterinsurgency..."

As bush puts off the decision of how he plans to fail next in his "New Way Forward" for Iraq - floating the unrealistic trial balloons of sending more troops in the meantime - remember these catastrophic decisions that our right-wingnut leaders have been proven to make over and over again.

Blogrolling Policy -This is a liberal blog and I have a liberal Blogrolling policy. I will add anyone to my Blogroll who adds me to theirs, whether conservative, liberal, moderate, libertarian, or even non-political, with the exception of spam blogs... If you Blogroll me and notice that I have not returned the favor, nudge me in the comments here until I notice!

Larry Craig and David Vitter — “two United States Senators implicated in extramarital sexual activity” — have named themselves as co-sponsors of S.J. Res. 43, the Marriage Protection Amendment. If passed, the bill would amend the Constitution to declare that marriage “shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.”